HANUMANPRASAD RAMESHWARDAS Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioners challenge the notices dtd. 6/1/2000 received by the Petitioners from the Tahasildar, Labour Dues Recovery, Mumbai demanding payment of Rs.9,38,153.00 towards dues of workers of Suvidha Warehousing Company (Private) Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as "the Company") and threatening the attachment and sale of the personal property of the Petitioners for recovery of dues as arrears of land revenue. The Petitioners have also challenged the fnal order dtd. 6/11/1999 under sec. 13 of Maharashtra Mathadi Hamal and Other Manual Workers (Regulation of Employment and Welfare) Act, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as "the Mathadi Act") and the Recovery Certifcate dtd. 30/12/1999 issued by the Respondent No. 3-Kirana Bazar and Dukane Mandal i.e. Grocery Market & Shop Board (hereinafter referred to as "the Board").

(2.) The Petitioners were at all material times the Directors of the Company. Under the provisions of the Mathadi Act and the scheme framed thereunder, both the employees and the employers are required to be registered with the Respondent No. 3 - Board. The Company was the registered employer with the Respondent No. 3-Board. For loading and unloading of goods, a toli of workers was assigned by the Respondent No. 3-Board to the Company and their dues are required to be deposited by the Company with the Respondent No. 3-Board. On failure to pay the dues, the Respondent No. 3-Board is empowered to issue Recovery Certifcate and request the Collector to recover the dues of the employer as arrears of land revenue under sec. 267 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code.

(3.) The issue arising in the Writ Petition is whether the Petitioners who are the Directors of the Company are personally liable to pay the dues of the workers under the Mathadi Act.